History
  • No items yet
midpage
Balkovec, C. v. Hidden Valley Four Seasons
1816 WDA 2015
| Pa. Super. Ct. | Jan 12, 2017
Read the full case

Background

  • Plaintiff Crystal Balkovec, a novice who had never skied before, alleged she was injured on January 9, 2014 while attempting a run at Hidden Valley Four Seasons Resort.
  • After successfully completing several beginner runs, she entered the "Lower Continental" slope, saw a large gap between trees, and turned left through it to stay on the run.
  • Immediately after negotiating the turn, she struck a large open ditch under a ski lift, was thrown 10–15 feet, and suffered serious injuries.
  • Balkovec’s complaint alleges Four Seasons failed to post signage, fencing, barricades, or warnings and failed to mark or restrict access to slopes deemed too dangerous for novices.
  • Four Seasons filed preliminary objections (demurrer) arguing the Skiers’ Responsibility Act preserves assumption-of-risk for downhill skiing and Balkovec’s injury was an inherent risk of the sport; the trial court sustained the objections and dismissed.
  • The Superior Court reversed and remanded, holding that the complaint raised factual questions whether the tree gap/ditch was an inherent skiing risk or a design/marking defect, so dismissal on preliminary objections was improper.

Issues

Issue Plaintiff's Argument Defendant's Argument Held
Whether dismissal on demurrer was proper because injury was an assumed inherent risk of downhill skiing Balkovec argues the complaint alleges a design/marking defect (no signs/barricades) and thus it’s unclear whether the risk was inherent Four Seasons argues veering through a gap in trees and encountering unseen terrain is an inherent, assumed risk of downhill skiing Reversed: complaint raises factual dispute whether risk was inherent or a noninherent design/marking defect; demurrer improper
Whether the trial court considered only the pleadings and gave opportunity to amend or conduct discovery Balkovec contends the trial court relied on facts not in the complaint and should have allowed amendment/discovery Four Seasons relied on the pleadings to argue assumption of risk bars the claim Superior Court noted trial court made factual findings beyond the complaint; dismissed claim should not have been resolved at demurrer stage
Whether the assumption-of-risk doctrine as preserved by the Skier’s Responsibility Act bars negligence claims for all skiing injuries Balkovec contends Act does not automatically bar claims where injury arises from noninherent defects Four Seasons contends Act preserves common-law assumption-of-risk so ski resorts owe no duty for inherent risks Court applied two-part test (engaged in skiing; injury from inherent risk) and found undecided factual question precluded dismissal
Whether factual issues (inherent risk vs. design/marking defect) are for a jury Balkovec argues case law makes this a factual question for jury Four Seasons argues the risk is plainly inherent and judgment should be decided as a matter of law Held for Balkovec on procedure: factual issues exist and cannot be resolved on preliminary objections; jury/summary process appropriate later

Key Cases Cited

  • Chepkevich v. Hidden Valley Resort, L.P., 2 A.3d 1174 (Pa. 2010) (explains that the Skiers’ Responsibility Act preserved common-law assumption-of-risk for downhill skiing and treats inherent risks as a no-duty rule)
  • Hughes v. Seven Springs Farm, Inc., 762 A.2d 339 (Pa. 2000) (sets two-part test: person was engaged in skiing and injury resulted from a risk that is common, frequent, and expected)
  • Jones v. Three Rivers Mgmt. Corp., 394 A.2d 546 (Pa. 1978) (discussion of inherent risks being those that are common, frequent, and expected)
  • Althaus ex rel. Althaus v. Cohen, 756 A.2d 1166 (Pa. 2000) (negligence requires duty; where no duty exists because risk is inherent, negligence principles are irrelevant)
  • Hill v. Slippery Rock Univ., 138 A.3d 673 (Pa. Super. 2016) (standard of review for preliminary objections/demurrers and construing pleadings in favor of the nonmoving party)
Read the full case

Case Details

Case Name: Balkovec, C. v. Hidden Valley Four Seasons
Court Name: Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Date Published: Jan 12, 2017
Docket Number: 1816 WDA 2015
Court Abbreviation: Pa. Super. Ct.